Why do GOP candidates keep stumbling on evolution? By Byron York

[Oceander]

I don't at all claim to understand the universe.  It's beyond my comprehension as a human on earth.  Your theories about the universe seem like wild ass guesses to me.   

Give me a few days - I do have other things to do - and I can present you with a good list of books.

In fact, I'll point you toward one in particular that rather comprehensively goes over things, viewed through the mathematics:  The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe, by Roger Penrose.

I will warn you tho', the author does expect a certain minimum level of mathematics.


Speaking of mathematics, let's try something simple:  Do you believe in infinity?

Even simpler, do you believe in the set of natural numbers?  Can you list every natural number?  If not, then how can you "believe" in the natural numbers?

[EC]

Wouldn't the fossil record record these millions of mutated generations.  I'm wondering where the evolutionary chain is that has Neanderthals extinct, yet chimpanzees unchanged for generations.  How does that work?

And yes, I realize you're a liberal plant here.  I just want some answers from your side for once.

Fossilization is a bit of an accident in the first place, otherwise the ground would be nothing but stone bones. Think of it as an extreme form of mummification - it can happen but doesn't happen often as all the conditions have to be right. The more intelligent the organism, or the faster or more mobile the organism, the less likely it's going to get caught in the first place.

Neanderthals are extinct mainly because we killed them. Part by war, part by out breeding them, part because we were simply better at co-operating than they were.

[Oceander]

*  *  *

Neanderthals are extinct mainly because we killed them. Part by war, part by out breeding them, part because we were simply better at co-operating than they were.

Were you there? 

More to the point: if you weren't there, in person, then how can you even contemplate such unprovable nonsense?

[Dexter]

Neanderthals are extinct mainly because we killed them. Part by war, part by out breeding them, part because we were simply better at co-operating than they were.

There is a lot of evidence that suggests interbreeding.

[Oceander]

There is a lot of evidence that suggests interbreeding.

Were you there? 

[Dexter]

Were you there? 

There is this cool thing called DNA that allows scientists to know that without having been there.

[Carling]

Give me a few days - I do have other things to do - and I can present you with a good list of books.

In fact, I'll point you toward one in particular that rather comprehensively goes over things, viewed through the mathematics:  The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe, by Roger Penrose.

I will warn you tho', the author does expect a certain minimum level of mathematics.


Speaking of mathematics, let's try something simple:  Do you believe in infinity?

Even simpler, do you believe in the set of natural numbers?  Can you list every natural number?  If not, then how can you "believe" in the natural numbers?

I'm agnostic.  I'm not at all afraid to admit that I don't know anything about the origins of life, or the universe, or any other science that can't be proven in a controlled scientific setting.  What is your point in responding to my posts?  I think Creationism is a tall tale, too, and has even less science around it than those who believe 100% in random evolution. 

[Carling]

Neanderthals are extinct mainly because we killed them. Part by war, part by out breeding them, part because we were simply better at co-operating than they were.

From which species did Neanderthals evolve?  That's my question.  I don't care how they died out.

[Dexter]

From which species did Neanderthals evolve?  That's my question.  I don't care how they died out.

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-heidelbergensis

[Oceander]

I'm agnostic.  I'm not at all afraid to admit that I don't know anything about the origins of life, or the universe, or any other science that can't be proven in a controlled scientific setting.  What is your point in responding to my posts?  I think Creationism is a tall tale, too, and has even less science around it than those who believe 100% in random evolution. 

Because your positions belie you.

[Carling]

Prove the Sun will rise tomorrow morning.

That's easy.  It's replicated 100% of the time. 

Was that the analogy you meant to use?

[Carling]

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-heidelbergensis

Your link doesn't scientifically prove anything.  I agree that evolution seems much more likely than creationism, but at least the creationists admit that their belief if based on faith.  You're posting nonsequiturs and red herrings, and expecting a skeptic like me to accept it as scientifically proven proof.

[Dexter]

Your link doesn't scientifically prove anything.  I agree that evolution seems much more likely than creationism, but at least the creationists admit that their belief if based on faith.  You're posting nonsequiturs and red herrings, and expecting a skeptic like me to accept it as scientifically proven proof.

All I did was answer your question.

[Luis Gonzalez]

For me, evolutionary theory means that man is the most intelligent organism this planet has seen.  That's a linear path of intelligence from start to finish.

I'm saying that the Evolutionists believe that evolution advances on random mutations, yet lead to advanced species.  That's as unbelievable as the world being created in 6 days not long ago. 

Please read what I've posted about random mutations, and what that should mean for the fossil record.

It is a linear path, but it's a linear path only because it is the end result.

Imagine that overworked Infinite Monkey Theorem. When viewed from that point in time when one monkey finally types out the works of Shakespeare the output can be easily misconstrued as Divine design, not just statistical mechanics, millions of monkeys and typewriters and an infinite amount of years.

There will be a linear path for that one monkey, but only because that's the inevitable outcome of the random nature of the theorem given the stage set by the Theorem.

[musiclady]

Prove punctuated equilibrium, as it applies to evolution, in a controlled scientific setting.  Why are you averse to the Scientific Method?

Remember, I'm not a creationist at all, either, but reading the BS from people like you who claim to know it all comes across as delusional as the 6-Day Creationists. 

What's wrong with just saying "we don't know?"

I have something to say here....

We just don't know.

Evolution cannot be proven (hard as they try) and Creation can't be proven.

However, I believe it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in Creation.  There are so many holes in the theory, and so many changes that it's hard to keep up.

And all the while, evolutionists act as though anyone who doubts them is stupid.

My Dad was in med school in the 1930's, and the evolution he was taught then as "fact" is completely ludicrous based on scientific evidence discovered since then.  His profs then were as arrogant as evolutionists are now in foisting their theories on an unsuspecting public.

My conclusion is still the same as it was before.  THERE IS NO SCIENCE OUTSIDE OF GOD.  HE is the Creator of everything we struggle to understand.  HE did it, and we are trying to figure out how and why.

Human beings were created separately, having a soul, creative ability, language, arts, consciences........ in HIS image.

That's all I need to know.

And the question for a conservative politician is STILL a leftist trap based on their template that conservatives are stupid people.

They should answer the question dismissively, as a completely irrelevant question for the goals they have for the country.

Because that's exactly what it is.

(btw, good job 'debating' with our Democrat plant here, Carling.  )

[Luis Gonzalez]

I have something to say here....

We just don't know.

SOMETHING has to be behind the rather linear path from an organic cell
Evolution cannot be proven (hard as they try) and Creation can't be proven.

However, I believe it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in Creation.  There are so many holes in the theory, and so many changes that it's hard to keep up.

And all the while, evolutionists act as though anyone who doubts them is stupid.

My Dad was in med school in the 1930's, and the evolution he was taught then as "fact" is completely ludicrous based on scientific evidence discovered since then.  His profs then were as arrogant as evolutionists are now in foisting their theories on an unsuspecting public.

My conclusion is still the same as it was before.  THERE IS NO SCIENCE OUTSIDE OF GOD.  HE is the Creator of everything we struggle to understand.  HE did it, and we are trying to figure out how and why.

Human beings were created separately, having a soul, creative ability, language, arts, consciences........ in HIS image.

That's all I need to know.

And the question for a conservative politician is STILL a leftist trap based on their template that conservatives are stupid people.

They should answer the question dismissively, as a completely irrelevant question for the goals they have for the country.

Because that's exactly what it is.

(btw, good job 'debating' with our Democrat plant here, Carling.  )

Not true at all.

Some believe in one thing and others believe in the other.

Whichever it is that you believe in, you believe because you are convinced that you know.

I absolutely believe in evolution, and the things that I've seen and read support what I believe in to my satisfaction.

I also don't see any conflict between evolution and religion.

[Luis Gonzalez]

BTW.

That whole linear path thing is a fallacy.

[GourmetDan]

BTW.

That whole linear path thing is a fallacy.

BTW.

That whole 'evolution' thing is based on multiple logical fallacies...

[musiclady]

Not true at all.

Some believe in one thing and others believe in the other.

Whichever it is that you believe in, you believe because you are convinced that you know.

I absolutely believe in evolution, and the things that I've seen and read support what I believe in to my satisfaction.

I also don't see any conflict between evolution and religion.

There is a difference between "believing" and "knowing."

There are many things we can, indeed, "know,"  but the details of how God created the universe are not included in that knowledge.

As Carling has, I believe successfully, argued above, evolution and the beginning of the earth cannot be proven scientifically.

No matter how educated the guesses are, nor how strong the preponderance of evidence is, no one truly knows.

I do believe that there is no conflict between science and Scripture.  The problem for the religious scientist is that the science of evolution changes rapidly, while Scripture remains constant.  As I mentioned earlier, I think it takes far more faith to believe that humans evolved from primordial ooze by chance than it does to believe that a loving God created humans in His image to fellowship with Him and to care for the rest of His creation.

I know those aren't the only two options, but at some point humans had to develop the ability to create a complex language, to create, to imagine, to care about one another........  It just makes more sense to me that God put it into us from the beginning than that it happened by chance over eons.

For me macro evolution makes absolutely no sense, and it certainly can't be proven, or known.

[Lando Lincoln]

This is just me... The concept of evolution does not conflict with or disrupt my faith.

[Luis Gonzalez]

There is a difference between "believing" and "knowing."

There are many things we can, indeed, "know,"  but the details of how God created the universe are not included in that knowledge.

As Carling has, I believe successfully, argued above, evolution and the beginning of the earth cannot be proven scientifically.

No matter how educated the guesses are, nor how strong the preponderance of evidence is, no one truly knows.

I do believe that there is no conflict between science and Scripture.  The problem for the religious scientist is that the science of evolution changes rapidly, while Scripture remains constant.  As I mentioned earlier, I think it takes far more faith to believe that humans evolved from primordial ooze by chance than it does to believe that a loving God created humans in His image to fellowship with Him and to care for the rest of His creation.

I know those aren't the only two options, but at some point humans had to develop the ability to create a complex language, to create, to imagine, to care about one another........  It just makes more sense to me that God put it into us from the beginning than that it happened by chance over eons.

For me macro evolution makes absolutely no sense, and it certainly can't be proven, or known.

Your second sentence contradicts your first sentence.

[GourmetDan]

This is just me... The concept of evolution does not conflict with or disrupt my faith.

Likewise, the concept of invisible pink unicorns does not conflict with or disrupt my faith...

[musiclady]

Your second sentence contradicts your first sentence.

No it doesn't.  Not in the slightest.

I can know many things.  (Like it's really cold outside and there is snow on the ground).  But I cannot "know" exactly how God created the universe.  I have the general idea based on the beginning of Genesis, but I don't know the details, just as scientists cannot know the details of the beginnings of the earth based on what they study in a lab.

If they could, their facts wouldn't change so drastically so often.

[musiclady]

IOW, many scientists claim they know things they only believe.

No contradiction whatsoever.

[olde north church]

Most people don't understand the idea behind evolution.  What is mocked by the "Godders" is, as is per typical, a misrepresentation. 
Linear evolution is incorrect.  Radial evolution would be more practical and correct.
Any "Godder" who misrepresents evolution should have their mouths sewn shut using sharpened sticks place in their lips.